- Country
- Singapore
- Initial Date
- Sep 25, 2019
- Event Description
Online sites that receive funding from and hire foreigners can easily be used to advance foreign interests, Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam said on Wednesday (Sept 25).
He highlighted sociopolitical website The Online Citizen (TOC) as an example, noting that it received support from and employs foreigners — including Malaysians — who write “almost exclusively negative articles” on social and political matters in Singapore.
Speaking at an S Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) conference on foreign-interference tactics and countermeasures on Wednesday (Sept 25), Mr Shanmugam pointed out that the site was responsible for an article at the heart of a defamation lawsuit brought by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.
Mr Lee’s lawyers had described content in the article as false, including allegations that Mr Lee had misled his late father into thinking the Government had gazetted their Oxley Road family home.
Mr Shanmugam said he was not commenting on the legal merits of the article and only that it was written by a Malaysian named Rubaashini Shunmuganathan, who is said to reside in Shah Alam, Selangor.
She was also behind another article urging Singaporean civil servants to follow the example of their counterparts in Hong Kong, which has been in the grip of months of protests. Noting that the writer has written many other articles to try to influence views in Singapore, Mr Shanmugam said this raised questions of who controls and pays her, and what purposes her work serves.Mr Shanmugam, who was speaking at the Parkroyal hotel on Beach Road, pointed out that most readers would assume that a Singaporean contributor was behind TOC’s articles.Only five out of 14 administrators of the website, which is helmed by chief editor Terry Xu, are in Singapore, he pointed out.
Nine are based elsewhere, including four in Malaysia and two in Indonesia.
“We don’t know who they are. Are they Singaporeans? Are they foreigners?” said Mr Shanmugam, who is also the Law Minister.
He noted that these online sites are “only interested to get eyeballs” and have been used by other countries to attack and deepen divisions. Responding to Mr Shanmugam in an article published on TOC, Mr Xu said: “Nothing goes unvetted by me, a Singaporean who has served his National Service and (is) held responsible by the Ministry of Communications and Information as the registered person in charge.” He added that there is “no law against hiring (a) person of foreign nationality” and TOC “has not used (or) received any foreign funding”.
ACTIVISTS WHO MET DR MAHATHIR
In another example cited by Mr Shanmugam, historian Thum Ping Tjin, political dissident Tan Wah Piow, freelance journalist Kirsten Han, civil-rights activist Jolovan Wham and graphic novelist Sonny Liew met Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad in Kuala Lumpur last year.
They urged the Malaysian leader to bring democracy to Singapore and other countries, with Dr Thum saying Singapore should be a part of Malaysia and celebrate independence on Malaysia Day on Sept 16, said Mr Shanmugam.
In an email to TODAY, Ms Han maintained that they never urged Dr Mahathir to bring democracy to Singapore and other countries. Instead, Dr Thum had asked Dr Mahathir to “take leadership in South-east Asia for the promotion of democracy, human rights, freedom of expression and freedom of information”, she said. “We talked very little about Singapore and asked him questions about Malaysia, given the huge political shift (there)."
Mr Shanmugam added that Ms Han and Dr Thum also set up New Naratif, a self-described movement for democracy and freedom of expression in the region, which receives foreign funds.
“Ms Han, on video, has said that Singapore has failed compared with Hong Kong, because 500,000 people don’t go on the streets to march, unlike (in) Hong Kong. And she wants to change that through classes run by New Naratif,” he said.
“(This) will seem ridiculous on so many levels, but leave that aside because everyone is entitled to their views, however reasonable or unreasonable.”
But he asked: “Should foreign contributions be received in order to push these lines?”
Ms Han noted that she made the comments cited by Mr Shanmugam in 2016, when New Naratif — which was set up in 2017 — did not exist.
In the video, which was recorded at a forum on activism and civil disobedience, Ms Han had said: “If you measure Singapore against Hong Kong and think that the goal that we want is to have 500,000 people in the streets, then, yes, Singapore fails because we do not get 500,000 people in the streets. But if the goal that we want, being at such an early stage, is growing discussion, growing pushback, growing networks and activism and civil society, then these are things that we can achieve and I would argue are actually happening already."
She added that it was important to acknowledge these efforts because “a social movement is not 500,000 (but) all the work that goes into potentially one day having 500,000 people in the streets”.
On Wednesday, Ms Han said that throughout her speech in the video, she had argued for "context" and highlighted "legitimate, non-violent ways for people to participate, such as organising parliamentary petitions or taking part in consultations". “Ideally, these processes will actually work and then we won’t ever need to consider a day when the situation is so desperate we need 500,000 people in the streets, which I think would be the best result for everyone involved," she said.
While the New Naratif has conducted "democracy classroom" sessions on topics such as public order and protest, and fake news, Ms Han noted that she did not say she would "hold classes to change the fact that Singapore doesn't have 500,000 people in the streets".
LAWS NEEDED
Mr Shanmugam reiterated that legislation was necessary and the state cannot take a hands-off approach because foreign interference in Singapore’s affairs is “an issue of sovereignty and national security”.
Laws must be able to counteract foreign interference, including giving the Government powers to make targeted, “surgical” interventions to investigate and respond quickly to hostile information campaigns.
The authorities must also have access to information to investigate the provenance of content, ascertain the extent to which it is being influenced by foreign parties and respond appropriately.
“The serious impact of hostile information campaigns on the social fabric, political sovereignty, peace, stability and national security has to be met head-on by states, working with technology companies as partners,” he said.
Other countries have done this, including France, which has introduced an information-manipulation law that mandates transparency over social-media platforms’ algorithms and election advertising.
It also allows the French national broadcasting agency to suspend television channels controlled or influenced by a foreign state.
Stressing that foreign interference is an “age-old threat” going back thousands of years, Mr Shanmugam said: “Governments have to lead from the front and we need to ensure we have the right tools to fight this.”
- Impact of Event
- 1
- Gender of HRD
- Woman
- Violation
- Vilification
- Rights Concerned
- Online, Right to healthy and safe environment, Right to protect reputation
- HRD
- Media Worker, Pro-democracy defender, WHRD
- Perpetrator-State
- Government
- Source
- Monitoring Status
- Pending
- Date added
- Apr 30, 2021
- Country
- Singapore
- Initial Date
- Nov 24, 2020
- Event Description
Civil rights activist Jolovan Wham Kwok Han was charged in a district court yesterday with two offences under the Public Order Act.
The 40-year-old Singaporean, who is the former executive director of migrant worker advocacy group Humanitarian Organisation for Migration Economics, had allegedly taken part in an assembly at the steps to the main entrance of the former State Courts building in Havelock Square around 9am on Dec 13, 2018.
He is said to have demonstrated support for the action of Xu Yuanchen, better known as Terry Xu, 38, the editor of sociopolitical website The Online Citizen (TOC), and TOC contributor Daniel De Costa Augustin, 37, by holding up a piece of paper with the words - "Drop the charges against Terry Xu and Daniel De Costa".
According to court documents, Wham had a photograph taken of himself demonstrating around the same time the pair were to be charged in court that day.
Xu and De Costa were both charged on Dec 13, 2018, with criminal defamation for allegedly defaming members of the Singapore Cabinet in a letter published on the TOC website. Their cases are still pending.
In the other charge, Wham is accused of taking part in a public assembly without a permit in the vicinity of Toa Payoh Central Community Club and Toa Payoh Neighbourhood Police Centre.
Around 1pm on March 28 this year, he is said to have held up a piece of cardboard with a smiley face drawn on it.
Court documents state it was to demonstrate his support for Nguyen Nhat Minh, who is said to have a similar snapshot captured at the same location on March 22.
In the photo, Minh allegedly held up a piece of cardboard with the words - "SG is better than oil@Fridays4futuresg".
There was no mention of Minh's case in court documents seen by The Straits Times.
With the two cases, Wham is facing seven charges in all. "Among others, he was charged in 2017 with organising a public assembly without a permit on MRT trains... He allegedly did so to commemorate the 30th anniversary of Operation Spectrum - an internal security operation that saw 22 activists arrested in 1987 in what the Government called a Marxist plot aimed at overthrowing it."
Among others, he was charged in 2017 with organising a public assembly without a permit on MRT trains along the North-South Line on June 3 that year.
He allegedly did so to commemorate the 30th anniversary of Operation Spectrum - an internal security operation that saw 22 activists arrested in 1987 in what the Government called a Marxist plot aimed at overthrowing it.
Wham's bail was set at $15,000 yesterday and his pre-trial conference will be held on Friday.
For taking part in a public assembly without a permit, an offender can be fined up to $5,000.
- Impact of Event
- 1
- Gender of HRD
- Man
- Violation
- Judicial Harassment
- Rights Concerned
- Freedom of expression Offline, Online, Right to liberty and security
- HRD
- Pro-democracy defender
- Perpetrator-State
- Judiciary
- Source
- Monitoring Status
- Pending
- Related Events
- Singapore: Activist Jolovan Wham investigated by police for protesting outside State Courts without permit
- Date added
- Nov 20, 2020
- Country
- Singapore
- Initial Date
- Nov 7, 2020
- Event Description
Lawyer M Ravi is being investigated for criminal defamation in relation to a Facebook post alleging that lawyer Mr Eugene Thuraisingam had told him that Law Minister K Shanmugam has said he “wields influence over the Chief Justice”, the police said on Saturday (Nov 7).
“The Public Prosecutor has issued an order pursuant to Section 16(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code for the police to investigate into the offence,” they said in a news release.
Mr Ravi's Facebook post on Nov 6 alleged that Mr Thuraisingam had told him that Mr Shanmugam had said he “wields influence over the Chief Justice” and “calls the shot and controlls (sic) Sundaresh Menon”.
Mr Thuraisingam wrote a letter to Minister Shanmugam on the same day Mr Ravi's Facebook post was published, stating that "[t]here is absolutely no truth whatsoever" to the allegations, the police said.
Mr Thuraisingam also posted a copy of the letter on his Facebook page, referring to Mr Ravi's post as "false and completely untrue".
According to Mr Thuraisingam, Mr Ravi had made similar allegations in a Facebook post published on Jun 12, 2017.
Mr Thuraisingam had then clarified with Mr Shanmugam on Jun 13, 2017 that Mr Ravi’s allegations were false. No police action was taken in that incident.
- Impact of Event
- 1
- Gender of HRD
- Man
- Violation
- Enactment of repressive legislation and policies, Judicial Harassment, Vilification
- Rights Concerned
- Online, Right to liberty and security
- HRD
- Lawyer
- Perpetrator-State
- Judiciary
- Source
- Monitoring Status
- Pending
- Date added
- Nov 11, 2020
- Country
- Singapore
- Initial Date
- Oct 6, 2020
- Event Description
The trial for Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's defamation suit against writer and financial adviser Leong Sze Hian opened on Tuesday (Oct 6).
The trial is set to run for the rest of the week before Justice Aedit Abdullah, with Mr Lee represented by Senior Counsel Davinder Singh and a team of lawyers, and opposition politician Lim Tean representing Mr Leong.
Mr Lee, 68, sued Mr Leong in late 2018 over a public Facebook post the latter shared on his page on Nov 7, 2018, containing a link to an article by Malaysian website The Coverage.
The article alleged that Mr Lee had helped former Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak launder money in relation to scandal-hit Malaysian state fund 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB).
Mr Lee's lawyers said the post contained "false and baseless" allegations that were "highly defamatory", including a purportedly libellous allegation that Mr Lee was "complicit in criminal activity relating to 1MDB".
Mr Leong, 66, said in December 2018 that he had complied with a notice from the Info-communications Media Development Authority on Nov 10 to take down the offending post, adding that he had "merely shared" the article with no comments.
After the suit was filed, Mr Leong's lawyer filed a counterclaim alleging that Mr Lee's libel suit was an abuse of court, but this was thrown out by the High Court and later by the Court of Appeal.
The apex court ordered Mr Leong to pay the Prime Minister costs of S$20,000 in September last year, after reiterating that the argument of abuse of court was not part of the law of Singapore and that a plaintiff has the right to choose who to sue for defamation.
Mr Lee arrived by car shortly past 9.30am on Tuesday, in a grey suit and a pale green tie. He waved to the people in the public gallery when he entered the courtroom. There is a limit of 20 people because of COVID-19 safe distancing measures.
Mr Lim and Mr Leong gave remarks to the media outside the Supreme Court before entering at about 9.45am, with Mr Leong saying he was armed only with the "sword of truth".
Members of the public queued for tickets to the public gallery from as early as 5.30am, and tickets were issued by 7am.
The trial comes after Mr Leong's lawyer was arrested on Friday (2 Oct)for alleged offences of criminal breach of trust and stalking.
He was released later that day.
- Impact of Event
- 1
- Gender of HRD
- Man
- Violation
- (Arbitrary) Arrest and Detention, Enactment of repressive legislation and policies, Judicial Harassment
- Rights Concerned
- Online, Right to liberty and security
- HRD
- Blogger/ Social Media Activist
- Perpetrator-State
- Government
- Source
- Monitoring Status
- Pending
- Date added
- Oct 6, 2020
- Country
- Singapore
- Initial Date
- Aug 21, 2020
- Event Description
Activist Jolovan Wham started serving a 10-day jail sentence on Friday (Aug 21) for organising an indoor event four years ago without a police permit.
The event was held in November 2016 at The Agora in Sin Ming Lane and was entitled Civil Disobedience And Social Movements. One of the speakers — albeit online — was Hong Kong dissident Joshua Wong. The others included activists Kirsten Han and Seelan Pelay.
Wham, who champions migrant worker rights, was convicted under the Public Order Act in 2019. He has not paid the S$2,000 fine and has chosen to go to jail.
This is the second time this year he will spend time in prison. On March 31, he served a one-week sentence for criticising the Judiciary rather than pay a S$5,000 fine.
On Thursday (Aug 20), he tweeted that his appeal on the indoor event had been dismissed.
On Friday, he posted photos with some friends who “came to see me off”, adding that he would “make the best of the situation to learn more about prison life while I’m inside”.
Wham also published on his Facebook and Twitter accounts a letter he had written to Mr Desmond Chin, the Commissioner of Prisons, to which he had received no reply.
He had recounted to Mr Chin the time he spent in Changi Prison earlier in the year and had made a request. “During my time there, I was confined to the cell for the entire duration of my sentence. Ordinarily, yard time would have been provided for inmates, but because of Covid, it was removed to prevent the spread of the virus. “Being confined for 24 hours in a small cell is quite inhumane. I am wondering it would be possible for the prison authorities to arrange staggered yard time for all inmates, while observing safe distancing. It should be possible to have yard time which is safe for everyone. I had raised this to the prison authorities during the time I was there but they said it was not possible. “Confining people for two weeks is cruel. Even if yard time was not permitted, even the opportunity to sit outside the cell and look at something else other than the 4 walls of the cell is a welcome relief. “I expect to be sentenced soon for another offence and will be serving time in prison once again. I would appreciate it if the prison authorities could look into this matter. Thank you for your time.”
- Impact of Event
- 1
- Gender of HRD
- Man
- Violation
- (Arbitrary) Arrest and Detention, Enactment of repressive legislation and policies, Judicial Harassment
- Rights Concerned
- Freedom of assembly, Offline, Right to liberty and security
- HRD
- Pro-democracy defender
- Perpetrator-State
- Judiciary
- Source
- Monitoring Status
- Pending
- Date added
- Aug 27, 2020
- Country
- Singapore
- Initial Date
- May 20, 2020
- Event Description
When is a photo a protest and a piece of cardboard a threat? Social worker and civil rights advocate Jolovan Wham will find out as he is now under formal police investigation over a photo of him holding a smiley face in public.
Wham said Wednesday that he has been ordered to report to Tanglin police, around two months after he took the photo in a show of solidarity with two youths under separate probes for photos they took of themselves demanding climate action.
�About 2 months ago, I held up a placard at Toa Payoh Central, took this picture and left immediately after. I�ve now received a letter that I�ve violated the Public Order Act and will have to be at Tanglin police division this Sunday at 2pm,� Wham wrote on Twitter.
�I did it in response to someone in sg who got investigated by the police for participating in a climate strike,� he added in another tweet today.
In response to Coconuts Singapore�s inquiries, the police said they were unable to comment further on the matter as it is the subject of an ongoing investigation.
On March 28, Wham posted a photo of himself with the smiley face online. It was taken outside the Toa Payoh Central Community Club, around the same spot where one of the climate activists had taken a photo.
It is illegal to hold public demonstrations without a permit in Singapore, even if it is just a silent protest involving one person. And the only public place Singaporeans have been granted a permit to do so is the Speaker�s Corner in Hong Lim Park.
Police said in April that they were investigating a 20-year-old man and an 18-year-old woman under the Public Order Act after photos of them posing in public with signs calling for climate action were posted online.
They were said to be founders of �fridays4futuresg,� a name that appears to be borrowed from a similarly named campaign by famed Swedish environment activist Greta Thunberg.
If convicted for his act of postmodern civil disobedience, Wham faces a S$3,000 fine.
In 2018, artist Seelan Palay was jailed two weeks after refusing to pay a fine after being convicted of an unlawful procession. He had walked from Hong Lim Park to the Parliament House while holding a mirror.
- Impact of Event
- 1
- Gender of HRD
- Man
- Violation
- Enactment of repressive legislation and policies, Judicial Harassment
- Rights Concerned
- Freedom of expression Online
- HRD
- Pro-democracy defender
- Perpetrator-State
- Police
- Source
- Monitoring Status
- Pending
- Related Events
- Singapore: Activist Jolovan Wham investigated by police for protesting outside State Courts without permit
- Date added
- Aug 21, 2020
- Country
- Singapore
- Initial Date
- Apr 1, 2020
- Event Description
Youths around the world have joined Swedish activist Greta Thunberg in taking their demands for climate action online due to the virus outbreak.
Unfortunately, two in Singapore may have found themselves on the wrong side of the law for publicly campaigning locally for the famed Fridays For Future movement. Police told reporters yesterday they are investigating a 20-year-old man and 18-year-old woman under the Public Order Act after photos of them posing in public with signs calling for climate action were posted online.
�I was informed that some people interpreted this as a challenge to authority,� the man, known on Instagram as @Menhguin, wrote yesterday after the police statement was released to the press.
No charges have yet been filed against the pair. @Menhguin said it was important that those who risk to lose yet are unable to vote to express themselves.
�@Fridaysforfuture in countless other countries comprises peaceful student demonstrations to express support for climate action. Students cannot vote, but their generation will be the most affected by climate change,� he said, adding that he had spent 10 hours at the police station. Singaporeans need to be at least 21 to vote.
It is illegal to hold public demonstrations without a permit in Singapore, even if it is just a silent protest involving one person. And the only public place Singaporeans have been granted a permit to do so is the Speaker�s Corner in Hong Lim Park.
For neither obtaining a permit nor demonstrating at the designated location, the duo face S$3,000 fines each if found guilty.
Photos showed that the man standing in front of the Toa Payoh Community Club and a police station holding a sign that read �SG is better than oil @fridays4futuresg.�
The woman was seen near the office of American petrochemical company ExxonMobil in Harbourfront holding signs reading �Planet over profit,� �School strike 4 climate,� and �ExxonMobil kills kittens & puppies.�
The woman, who posts to Instagram as @Jminsrus, has made no comment on her account since the police released the statement but shared the @Menhguin�s post in a story.
According to the police, the incidents happened March 13 and 22, the same time Thunberg began calling on people around the world to go on a �digital strike� since protesting in the streets was no longer feasible due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.
As part of the online strike, Thunberg called on people to publish photos of themselves holding signs with the hashtag #ClimateStrikeOnline, some of which she would then repost.
But instead of joining the online protest by using the same hashtag, the duo borrowed the campaign name to create separate Instagram and Twitter accounts called @Fridays4Futuresg and @F4Fsg, respectively, and calling on people to post similar photos with the hashtag #climatestrikesg.
The Twitter account has been set to private while the Instagram account has gone dark.
The man did not address why the duo had decided to create an offshoot of Thunberg�s campaign.
Last month, Thunberg reportedly applied to trademark her name and �Fridays For Future� to stop people from impersonating her or capitalizing on the movement�s name.
- Impact of Event
- 2
- Gender of HRD
- Man, Woman
- Violation
- Censorship, Intimidation and Threats
- Rights Concerned
- Freedom of assembly, Offline, Right to healthy and safe environment, Right to Protest
- HRD
- Environmental rights defender, WHRD, Youth
- Perpetrator-State
- Police
- Source
- Monitoring Status
- Pending
- Date added
- Aug 21, 2020
- Country
- Singapore
- Initial Date
- Mar 16, 2020
- Event Description
The Observatory has been informed by reliable sources about the sentencing of Mr. Jolovan Wham, social worker, human rights advocate, and former Executive Director of the NGO Humanitarian Organisation for Migration Economics (HOME) [1].
According to the information received, on March 16, 2020, Singapore’s Court of Appeal upheld the High Court’s judgement issued on April 29, 2019, which sentenced Mr. Jolovan Wham to S$5,000 (around 3,290 Euros) or one week of prison, in case he could not pay the fine. In addition, the Court of Appeal ordered Mr. Jolovan Wham to remove his Facebook post in which he made comments about the independence of the Singaporean and Malaysian courts (see background information).
The Observatory condemns the sentencing and ongoing judicial harassment against Mr. Jolovan Wham, which seem to be only aimed at punishing him for his legitimate human rights activities and for the exercise of his right to freedom of opinion and expression. The Observatory calls on the authorities of Singapore to put an immediate end to the harassment against Mr. Jolovan Wham.
Background information:
On October 9, 2018, the Singapore High Court found Mr. Jolovan Wham guilty of violating Article 3 (1) (a) of the 2016 Administration of Justice (Protection) Act (“scandalising the court”). Mr. Jolovan Wham’s prosecution and conviction stemmed from one of his Facebook posts published on April 27, 2018, in which he shared a news story about a constitutional challenge against Malaysia’s Anti-Fake News Act and commented that Malaysian judges were “more independent than Singapore’s for cases with political implication”. The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) reasoned that the post “did not constitute fair criticism of the court” and that it “posed a risk that public confidence in the administration of justice would be undermined”. Mr. Jolovan Wham’s sentencing hearing was first set for November 7, 2018 and postponed several times. Article 3 (1) (a) of the Administration of Justice (Protection) Act provides for up to three years in jail or a fine of S$100,000 (around 62,740 Euros), or both.
This was the first conviction for “scandalising the court” under the 2016 Administration of Justice (Protection) Act, which came into effect on October 1, 2017. This crime is defined as “Any person who scandalises the court by intentionally publishing any matter or doing any act that —(i) imputes improper motives to or impugns the integrity, propriety or impartiality of any court; and (ii) poses a risk that public confidence in the administration of justice would be undermined”.
During a hearing on March 21, 2019, the Prosecutor asked the High Court to sentence Mr. Jolovan Wham to a fine of between S$10,000 (around 6,580 Euros) and S$15,000 (around 9,870 Euros).
On April 29, 2019, the Singapore High Court imposed on Mr. Jolovan Wham a fine of S$5,000 (around 3,290 Euros) following his conviction on charges of scandalising the court. Mr. Jolovan Wham was also required to pay S$5,000 in legal expenses to the Prosecutor and S$2997.82 (around 1,973 Euros) in disbursements to the Attorney’s General Chambers. Mr. Wham appealed the sentence.
- Impact of Event
- 1
- Gender of HRD
- Man
- Violation
- Denial Fair Trial, Judicial Harassment
- Rights Concerned
- Online, Right to fair trial
- HRD
- Pro-democracy defender
- Perpetrator-State
- Government, Judiciary
- Source
- Monitoring Status
- Pending
- Related Events
- Singapore: activist fined for Facebook post on courts
- Date added
- Mar 24, 2020
- Country
- Singapore
- Initial Date
- Mar 2, 2019
- Event Description
SINGAPORE: Social worker and activist Jolovan Wham is being investigated for protesting outside State Courts without a valid permit, police said on Saturday (Mar 2). Wham had posted a photo on Dec 13 on social media channels, which showed him standing outside the court complex while holding up a piece of paper that read: "Drop the charges against Terry Xu and Daniel De Costa." The protest happened the same day Terry Xu, the editor of socio-political website The Online Citizen, and Daniel De Costa were charged for publishing an article that alleged corruption among the Singapore Government's highest officers. In response to Channel NewsAsia's queries, police said that Wham had written to the police earlier in November to apply for a permit to stage a protest outside the State Courts. His application was not approved. "The State Courts is gazetted as a Prohibited Area under the Public Order Act, with stricter security protocols," police said. "He was well aware that a police permit was required for such an event. Still, he went ahead to protest outside the State Courts on Dec 13, 2018." Police also cited Wham's prior public order related offences, and said it reflected "a pattern of Wham's wilful disregard for Singapore's laws". Wham was sentenced on Feb 21 for organising a public assembly without a permit. He was fined S$3,200 but chose to serve jail time for 16 days in default. He was found guilty over a November 2016 event - titled Civil Disobedience and Social Movements - that featured a live speech by Hong Kong activist Joshua Wong Chi-Fung. In 2017, Wham also organised a "silent protest" on an MRT train and pasted two A4-sized sheets on the window. In July that year he asked the public on Facebook to participate in a vigil outside Changi Prison Complex and proceeded to hold the event without applying for the requisite permit. Wham also refused to sign statements to the police, which is required by law. "There are avenues for Singaporeans to express their views on issues that concern them. The Speakers' Corner was set up in 2000 to allow Singaporeans to conduct public assemblies without the need for a permit, subject to certain conditions being met," police added.
- Impact of Event
- 1
- Gender of HRD
- Man
- Violation
- Enactment of repressive legislation and policies, Intimidation and Threats, Judicial Harassment
- Rights Concerned
- Freedom of assembly, Right to Protest
- HRD
- Pro-democracy defender
- Perpetrator-State
- Government, Police
- Source
- Monitoring Status
- Pending
- Date added
- Sep 20, 2019
- Country
- Singapore
- Initial Date
- Jan 3, 2019
- Event Description
SINGAPORE - A Singaporean activist was found guilty on Thursday, January 3, of organizing an illegal protest after holding what he called a "harmless" public discussion in 2016 that featured Hong Kong democracy campaigner Joshua Wong speaking via Skype. Jolovan Wham, 39, was charged with violating public order laws because he failed to apply for a police permit before inviting Wong, a non-Singaporean, to speak via video call to an audience in the tightly controlled city-state. Wham, who is also an advocate for migrant workers' rights, said earlier in a Facebook post that the gathering in November 2016 "was a harmless and straightforward discussion about social movements". But district judge Kessler Soh Boon Leng said in his verdict Thursday that the prosecution proved the charges against Wham "beyond reasonable doubt" and set sentencing for January 23. Wong, who was among the leaders of the massive pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong in 2014, spoke about the role of civil disobedience and democracy in building social movements. Organizing a public assembly without a permit in Singapore is punishable by a fine of up to Sg$5,000 ($3,600). Repeat offenders can be fined up to Sg$10,000 or jailed a maximum six months or both. The wealthy city-state is regularly criticized by rights groups for its heavy-handed response to political dissent and freedom of expression. Last month, the editor of a Singaporean website was charged with defamation for publishing a letter alleging corruption among the country's leaders. The same month, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong sued a blogger for defamation over a Facebook post alleging he was the target of an investigation in neighbouring Malaysia related to the scandal-plagued wealth fund 1MDB. Update: On 21 February 2019, Jolovan was sentenced to a fine of S$3,200 (US$2,367), or by default, 16 days in prison.
- Impact of Event
- 1
- Gender of HRD
- Man
- Violation
- Enactment of repressive legislation and policies, Judicial Harassment
- Rights Concerned
- Freedom of assembly, Online, Right to fair trial, Right to Protest
- HRD
- Pro-democracy defender
- Perpetrator-State
- Government, Judiciary
- Source
- Monitoring Status
- Active
- Date added
- Sep 20, 2019
- Country
- Singapore
- Initial Date
- Apr 29, 2019
- Event Description
A Singaporean activist was Monday fined for questioning the independence of the judiciary on Facebook, the latest case to highlight what critics say is the country's heavy-handed approach towards dissent. While it is wealthy and modern in many ways, tightly-controlled Singapore is regularly criticised by rights groups for restricting freedom of expression with tough laws. In the latest case, activist Jolovan Wham was found guilty in October of contempt of court for posting on Facebook that Singapore's judiciary lacked integrity and independence in cases involving the government or politicians. On Monday, High Court Judge Woo Bih Li sentenced him to a fine of Sg$5,000 ($3,674) or a one-week jail term if he fails to pay. He was also ordered to pay more than Sg$7,000 in legal and other costs. State prosecutors had asked for a fine up to three times higher, with a maximum three weeks in jail if he failed to pay. Wham, who is also an advocate for migrant workers' rights, said he will appeal the conviction and sentence. "It's not over yet," the 39-year-old told AFP. The judge noted that Wham "did not show any remorse" even after conviction, but did not agree to a request from prosecutors for the court to order him to apologise and remove the post. It was Wham's latest run-in with the authorities. In February, he was fined Sg$3,200 for organising an illegal public discussion that featured prominent Hong Kong democracy campaigner Joshua Wong speaking via Skype. He is also appealing that ruling. His cases are among several that have alarmed rights groups. In December, the editor of a Singaporean website was charged with defamation for publishing a letter alleging corruption among the country's leaders. The same month, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong sued a blogger for defamation after he shared an article on Facebook linking the leader to a corruption scandal in neighbouring Malaysia. Lee said the article was false and without basis.
- Impact of Event
- 1
- Gender of HRD
- Man
- Violation
- Denial Fair Trial, Judicial Harassment
- Rights Concerned
- Online, Right to fair trial
- HRD
- Pro-democracy defender
- Perpetrator-State
- Government, Judiciary
- Source
- Monitoring Status
- Pending
- Related Events
- Singapore: activist fined for Facebook post on courts
- Date added
- Sep 19, 2019
11 shown of 11 entities